Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robert Wakefield (ca.1493/5-1537) and his brother Thomas (1500-1575) were pioneers in the study and teaching of Hebrew in early modern England, but the range of their learning and their accomplishments has received scant scholarly attention.Robert was trained at Cambridge, where he was closely associated with the educational reforms of John Fisher.He claimed to have acquired his expertise in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Arabic through long study of books that had come into his hands rather than from teachers.By the 1520s, however, his erudition combined respectable biblical scholarship with knowledge of later Jewish literature, eventually bringing him professorial status in Louvain and in Cambridge, and later in Oxford.Thomas, who enjoyed long tenure as praelector in Hebrew at Cambridge, took possession of his brother's books and manuscripts upon his sudden death.Thomas was a compulsive annotator of his books, and through his notes it has been possible to learn a great deal about his intellectual, philological, and theological interests.His marginalia in a copy of the Hebrew Bible he inherited reveal an overwhelming desire to return to the pristine version of the text of scripture, the Hebraica veritas.This volume draws together the political, linguistic, and bibliographical materials that shaped the careers of these two scholars, often serving to revise previous claims.The essays, while representing important contributions in their own right, also reflect on each other, extending arguments and drawing together thematic conjunctions to produce a compelling analysis of Hebrew learning in sixteenth-century England.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.739 | 0.639 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".